@99occupyBoycott For Owning Equally #Boycott4OwningEq: Starting in boycotting groups to become co-owners. The customers (being the 99%), can become co-owners in media and market networks being the medium between the producers owners (1%) and their customers (99%)!

No Weapon Industry Profit!Make Peace by signing this petition: "I think it is ok to support those who would not pay tax as long as their government would not fully (100%) tax all weapon production profit or eliminate any such profit."

Developing the platform: For agpl developers on github developing the comcom-platforms, starting in Uid - an Identification device for democratic applications providing a unique identification per each user/owner.

Organization's RegisteringFrom here we create the market for comcomized units. We begin here in estimating this market, by asking for the contact of each organization, the number of its peers and its value. This page is designed mainly for organizers.

GovComComGovComCom - Make the bailouts or privatizations working for the people! The ordinary people can takeover central banks and banks and start demand before any privatization or nationalisation to first have the list of the ordinary people, which are claimed by the government to be benefited form such act , and then to demand that those ordinary people would become equal shareholders in the institutes planned to be bailed or sold out!

peers' homesArtist activist or student using editing and 24/7 steaming/transmitting room and bringing their young spirit in an authentic trend to a developing area. Authentic why? Just because they are all groups of peer owners!

Customers' Equal OwnershipAs any effective group of customers must be diverse and big, it cannot fit to the structure of cooperative, since cooperative is only suitable to small and homogenic groups, as the power of minorities or individuals in cooperative, is inversely proportional to its size and as its homogeneity is inversely proportional to the benefit of its members also to exit it.
» Terms & Reasons1) Tradability, 2) The d,3) Peers' autonomy, 4) Coherent Layering, 5) Flexibility of the d and 6) Recursive nature of the contract. AS d * i = c * n , where d (as in Decentralization ) is the ratio of the portion held by all the peer owners, i is the number of Issues shares, c is the Count of all peer owners and n is the number of shares per each peer owner.
»» e.g. for Contract
»» Learn/TeachWorkshops/Assemblies/Interviewes: We spread comcomism on the ground and online and in parallel
» Mailing lists
»» Contact/Chat/Twitt
»» Neighborhoods of The People
»»» TakeShare ItThe people's humane and effective media - the media of the people by the people and for the people. Clone your "buildup" site to create or join your networks, contents and events » Page categories . The people's humane and effective media - the media of the people by the people and for the people. What it is about? Spreading anyone's events in info points from one calendar connecting small communities maintaining the points. What it's for? Practicing The Freedom Of Assemblies around the info points publishing the events of/by anyone. How? As the events are flushed from one calendar, the calendar is moderated by the ("talking") communities maintaining the info points, where the calendar with its history is able to be cloned for further forking and where specific common pages are able to be included.

this is for the user adding content and activity to this site. please ask for and let other now what you would like to have here and if you have any question about how to edit your page etc, please let us help you, thanks.

I come to know about your site from my friend and when i came here i come to know that a lot of information waiting for me…..
curt
Nike Air Royal Mid VT on www. nicetick.com/nike-air-royal-mid-vt-blue-molded-leather-club-purple.html

Who are obama's brother/sisters over which he is the kipper,? The bankers? Well if they are such wizard who could make 12 times more for each dollar, why shouldn't they be GovComComized now?
please let obama know about comcom!
It seems that he is now surrounded by such officers who call transparency the act of telling you what they want to tell or sell but without the act of letting you know by letting you ask your questions.
see more here: http://iswith.wikidot.com/govcomcom

Well - for answering this question, I have to give you a little backround regarding the structure of the german language. There exist three different articles, one for each male, female and neutral, in both cases, determined as well as undetermined ('the' and 'a'). That is how each mentioning of a person is identified as either male or female. This distinction is continued throughout all the grammar, for pronouns, adjectives etc.

In addition, the female form of any specification of a person (such as e.g. shareholder) is expressed by the suffix 'in', so that a female shareholder would be a shareholderin, which for plural then reaches the form of shareholderinnen.

Now the solutions in use keep grammatical correctness and usually function by ecplicit mentioning of both, the male and the female form, applied in one of several ways, such as e.g.: "shareholder and shareholderin" or "shareholder/in" or "shareholderIn" etc. Of course then, according to the grammar, this duplification has to be continued throughout all the sentence.

The solution, which the translator applied, acts differently. Intentionally it breaks the rules of grammar insofar, that consequently it uses the (male) basic form of the specification (e.g. shareholder), but combined with consequently using the female article and the grammatical female form of the sentence. That is, we talk about a she and her shares, but we do that using the usual and common and simple (and male) form of the person's specification (shareholder).

The advantage is to avoid mutations, such as e.g. Each(m/f) shareholder/in holds his/her shares until his/her membership extends and he/she decides to become a(m/f) member/in., where the concentration is constantly trapped in the slashes. Also, but this is my very subjective feeling, the suffix in always lets me feel like some kind of handicapped person, i am not only an electrician, i am an insisted electricianin, i must get this tail to anything, just to exist. So I found, that happily I can be called an electrician, as long as I am referred to as a she - which is exactly, what I am doing in my way of translation.

The slight irritation, I feel, can be easily overcome, where soon you get used to this form. And how do you (german speaker) feel it?

as those of you, who know german, french, italian, espanol, hebrew, arabic etc etc etc may be aware to, the usual form to express, that male and female persons are talked about, is to just use the male form. I don't like it. Me, as a german speaker, am constantly trying to be creative in always new approaches regarding that effect. It is always a 'dance on the wire' between the readability and the flow of the writing at one hand, and the -in my opinion- necessary explicit mentioning of females in some way at the other hand.

In german, there are some -more or less sophisticate- approaches in use by people trying to be pc, but all of which seem in one or the other way poor, miserable, stiff and/or not fun.

Others claim, well, of course we mean also females, what is the fuss about…

Sure. Just, if you are (incidently) a male person, and you symphatize with this claim, just for fun try a little exercise: Replace the male form with the female form in any arbitrary text, read it, and find out if 'of course' you feel meant, too. I am curious about the result, you're welcome to share it at this place…

And you are welcome to share your opinion as well as any other thoughts, ideas, suggestions, critics etc about the subject, considering the german or any other concerned language (english doesn't seem to be so much affected, is that right?)

Looking forward to your feedback and to a developing discussion, which, in the best case, hopefully may even lead to a better solution…

e.g. why shareholder can not be both Common shareholder and Private shareholder (Point 3), why d must be static (Point 2)?

Because these 6 points are for achieving an outstanding standard by which full transparency can be easily get by knowing the d alone, hence the distinction between the 2 portion must be fully clear. This standard must be simple (one factor - the d), if the purpose is decentralization of the market, which is the case for the concept of the ComCom.

When constantly dedicating (1/d-d)*v of all common shareholders
to be held by another common company of which d=1,
for baying private shares at their minimal price reflected from said v,
then the common shareholders can protect the value of v, when baying them by the latter company at the minimal price, if it is to be agreed between the shareholder.

<\ ok so let's say Alice is a client and Bob is a shareholder
what happens?
/> ok, but not, lets say Alice is private shareholder and Bob is client being common shareholder
<\ ok
/> you need to define what kind of shareholder, more then if the one is client or shareholder
<\ so Bob pays 10 once plus 24 per month?
/> y
so, we need also to define d, lets say d=0.8, that is to say from the total and divednt
bob with the other such common would get only 80%
and Alice with other such private would get 20%
now we can calculate the "membership"
lets say each such as bob pay 24 in cycle
<\ ok
/> also lets say that we have 100 common
and that the company pay for salary etc some expenses , lets say 1000.
<\ ok
/> so we have from membership 2400, minus 1000, left over 1400 to share in dividend, if we do not want to invest that for the future

<\ who's doing the work?
/> those who get payed and/or the members, as in the web 2.0 strategies
<\ ok let's get the whole picture
let's say we make databases for companies
/> ok
<\ we have 100 coders
we have 1000 customers
/> ok
you can do it in 2 ways:
the question is who are we, are we private shareholders? and do we need such, for investment
<\ ok start over
/> so lets say we need some investment we would put d=0.8, for real investor to be private shareholders, and we the coders would be 100 common share holders, we would pay our holding by coding
<\ let's say we make a web browser with smellovision
/> what is smellovision?
<\ you can smell people over the internet
joke
/> fine
so lets define numbers here
say we want 1m investment, we are 100 coder having already the concept
we expect market of ?
… ok lets say market of 100m
so
the privet investors would get , from the market of 100m only 20m whereas each of the common share holder would get 800,000
but that is if we did not expanses,
<\ ok
now
/> now let say the market was here defined per year
<\ what happens with the 10 and 24?
if I don't code I pay 24 a month
but if I code I don't pay anything?
/> moment,
it, how to use the d or the distinction can be played in different ways
in the 1st e.g. we talked about some thing like web 2.0 thing and in the 2nd about hard core developers
you can play it more wide if you would allow 3rd party services as part of the structure
<\ but where is the 10 and the 24?
/> in the 2nd e.g. the 10 is the activity of the common shareholder being the coders, and the 24 is payed by the companies to which we sell the smelling machine
<\ ok so if I code I don't pay and if I don't code I pay?
If I'm the common shareholder?
/> that is in the 2nd, the client is fully distinguished from the company whereas in 1st the client is part of building the company
if the company get income from non common share holder, the company is free from them, those are the clients of the smelling machine
<\ Ok example:
100 people have shares, 50 code, 50 pay 10
/> define common and privet please
also the d
<\ all are common
and .8
how does the share price go up or down?
/> yes it can be, but i do not know if this what you mean
it means that those who pay 10 and those who code are EQUAL
<\ ok
fair enough
/> now it may hold with the payment of membership
<\ membership = cost of service?
/> but if that is so, why not having the coder in the private
membership cost = cost of service+ benfite
<\ benefits?
like
what?
I think I get it
/> of the shareholders , like dividend and holding Intellectual Properties
<\ ok
/> 8-|:P:D

<\ Alice is 100 coders, Bob is 10m buyers, Charlie is 1m investor
/> so
<\ something is odd about it
/> 1st question do we want the buyers to be common shareholders
ok look
<\ let's start with no
buyer is just customer
make it simple then more complex
/> so this is easy have the investor in private and the coder in common, and you are done
<\ how much code = 1 share?
Alice is common and Charlie is private
<\ right
1000 lines of code, 2 months of code?
20 hours per month of maintenance of code?
/> so 0.008 get each coder and0.2 get Charlie
<\ if coder stops coding?
/> from the income, which did not say, did we define the income?
he get!!!
this is so much important in relation to open source
<\ I know
but it has to be reasonable or no one invest as private
/> he gets, he might get less, because other coder gut in where he gut out of coding, but not from common shareholding, that is to say we would have more common share holders
<\ How about this:
/> it is so reasonable, since no gut my invention, because i am not going to code all my life
?
<\ I have an idea
if coder stops coding, he becomes private shareholder
from his coding but no longer has control of code
or something
/> let me say this:
1. no one can be both common and private shareholder
<\ right has to exchange
/> 2. the values might feet to what you suggest but not always
<\ charter of company would state that
there is a way to do this very simple
/> can exchange but not be both, btw you can have common company in one portion and be persnal privte shareholder in the other
so no problem, it depended on the value
it might hold, but the problem is of being scalable
e.g. we begin in d=0.8 and 1M private and 100 coders
being common
now the company gut huge
its total is 1b
no , sorry YOU ARE RIGHT
it holds
because the common would be exchanging for the right proportion
but
<\ someone who pays 10 gets 800,000, someone who pays 1million gets 200,000 something wrong there
/> to summarize, such regulation, we need to granty that the private holder would agree because that one going to loose
it not hold, sorry again
<\ there is a way to do this but it's going to have to be carefully done
/> because the common would evacuate place for other common , but the private would not agree to pay it
<\ ok let's try a different way:
/> look take yourself in the private
as private you are going to pay from your share for nothing to the common one
this cause fraction!!!
<\ yup
after 6 years investor makes profit 200,000 while coder buys a hotel
/> just to add for this case, all the common would benfite from that exachnge
>?<hotel<?!>
<\ small hotel
/> no problem , go on
<\ ok
here's the way to do:
the code is made of modules
/> y?
<\ so we can know the value of the code
/> …
<\ so we know how to exchange
/> but why should we!?
<\ never mind my mistake
/> we could add new common constatly, if the value of the code is such which would alow to build on it
then we say we have 100 coder to BEGIN with , the would make such amount of code, which genrate income
that income sould continue ONLY if more coder would com in
so the income would increse , it would be added
<\ ok
/> now to this flow we add more doprs, more coders
<\ how about this: no common or private
/> more income distinuted between more coders
all are common
<\ code = .8 and money = .2
make it simple that way
or better
/> code is common money is private, but what is the moeny income or out come?
<\ investor gets 20million coder get 800,000
/> so that is what we talked before?
<\ only coder is common there is no money common
because 800,000/10 = 80,000x profit, 20m/1m = 20x profit
investor makes more but spends less
er but common spends less
/> i did not gut the different, please try to use the (my) definition we already established

Hi, only this page shows its comments but this page as any other page has its thread in the forum of this site and have its bottom, see the discuss(number of comments) and click it for to go to the thread for to find the relevant page see this

Any page you can also rate and in any case: Let the others learn and earn from your learning, please watch the threads ask, replay, post etc.

You can also create pages in this site and after contacting they might be included in this font page.

All about ComCom and/or about how to realize it (how to ComCom it)
is in our need, we must let it out!

Having the skills, idea/s, mission/s, ambition and/or a group or being an artist and/ or a developer, why do not you make your own common company and/or become a private or a common shareholder in such companies?

For making a Common company, have or initiate, by yourself or with your partners/friends (with cost of max 40 pounds), a Private company (such as IsWith Ltd for you ComCom social networking, 145-157 St John St, London, EC1V 4PY) and then as its private shareholder/s, with or without the intended to be common shareholders, define its d and let the Ltd company provide such Forum associated with such Mailing list:

to which subscribing is currently free,

of which members could become Private or Common shareholders of the Ltd company and

of which size (-the size of the list) could become a factor in negotiation

with other Privet shareholders and/or

with 3rd party providers of services.

Here you are provided with the formal and public staff related to the idea and the rest, including the practice, is provided at IsWith.info.